= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JoshuaZ comments on Prisoner's Dilemma Tournament Results - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (170)
If we do this again, I'm almost tempted to submit a really perverse example which does the opposite of tit for tat. So, defect on the first turn, and cooperate on turn n iff they defected on n-1. I'm pretty sure this would go really badly.
Hmm, I notice also that no one tried naive always cooperate. Would be interesting to see how well that does.
I thought of this too, but it really should play C then D to start so it cooperates against itself - otherwise, it will defect against itself.
Given the payoff matrix for this tournament, it isn't a very good strategy. However, if the payoff matrix rewarded D-C more strongly, then a pair of (tit-for-tat, tit-for-tat's complement) would do very well.
Tested that, in the round-robin it is somewhere about the average, in the evolutionary dies out (albeit more slowly that the defectors).